distal tephra from campanian eruptions in early late holocene … · 2020. 9. 22. · tephra layer...

University of Groningen

Distal tephra from Campanian eruptions in early Late Holocene fills of the Agro Pontinograben and Fondi basin (Southern Lazio, Italy)Sevink, Jan; van Gorp, Wouter; Di Vito, Mauro A.; Arienzo, Ilenia

Published in:Journal of Volcanology and Geothermal Research

DOI:10.1016/j.jvolgeores.2020.107041

IMPORTANT NOTE: You are advised to consult the publisher's version (publisher's PDF) if you wish to cite fromit. Please check the document version below.

Document VersionPublisher's PDF, also known as Version of record

Publication date:2020

Link to publication in University of Groningen/UMCG research database

Citation for published version (APA):Sevink, J., van Gorp, W., Di Vito, M. A., & Arienzo, I. (2020). Distal tephra from Campanian eruptions inearly Late Holocene fills of the Agro Pontino graben and Fondi basin (Southern Lazio, Italy). Journal ofVolcanology and Geothermal Research, 405, [107041]. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jvolgeores.2020.107041

CopyrightOther than for strictly personal use, it is not permitted to download or to forward/distribute the text or part of it without the consent of theauthor(s) and/or copyright holder(s), unless the work is under an open content license (like Creative Commons).

Take-down policyIf you believe that this document breaches copyright please contact us providing details, and we will remove access to the work immediatelyand investigate your claim.

Downloaded from the University of Groningen/UMCG research database (Pure): http://www.rug.nl/research/portal. For technical reasons thenumber of authors shown on this cover page is limited to 10 maximum.

Download date: 14-08-2021

https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jvolgeores.2020.107041

https://research.rug.nl/en/publications/distal-tephra-from-campanian-eruptions-in-early-late-holocene-fills-of-the-agro-pontino-graben-and-fondi-basin-southern-lazio-italy(a28129ac-4eff-4c2d-b165-19f1d18c27d1).html


Journal of Volcanology and Geothermal Research 405 (2020) 107041

Contents lists available at ScienceDirect

Journal of Volcanology and Geothermal Research

j ourna l homepage: www.e lsev ie r .com/ locate / jvo lgeores

Distal tephra fromCampanian eruptions in early Late Holocene fills of theAgro Pontino graben and Fondi basin (Southern Lazio, Italy)

Jan Sevink a,⁎, Wouter van Gorpb, Mauro A. Di Vito c, Ilenia Arienzo c

a Institute for Biodiversity and Ecosystem Dynamics (IBED), University of Amsterdam, Sciencepark 904, 1098 XH Amsterdam, the Netherlandsb Groningen Institute of Archaeology, Poststraat 6, 9712 ER Groningen, the Netherlandsc Istituto Nazionale di Geofisica e Vulcanologia (INGV), Via Diocleziano 328, 80124 Napoli, NA, Italy

⁎ Corresponding author.E-mail addresses: [email protected] (J. Sevink), W.van.G

[email protected] (M.A. Di Vito), [email protected]

https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jvolgeores.2020.1070410377-0273/© 2020 The Authors. Published by Elsevier B.V

a b s t r a c t
a r t i c l e i n f o
Article history:Received 1 March 2020Received in revised form 19 August 2020Accepted 31 August 2020Available online 7 September 2020

Keywords:Distal tephraTephrochronologyGeochemistryRadiocarbon datingEarly Late HoloceneCentral Italy

Following on the discovery (in 2011) of a layer of distal tephra from the Pomici di Avellino eruption (Somma-Ve-suvius, EU5) in the Agro Pontino (southern Lazio, Italy), further detailed study of the Holocene sediment archivesin this graben and in the nearby Fondi coastal basin showed that distal tephra from this EU5 eruption occurs as arather continuous, conspicuous layer. Two other, less conspicuous tephra layerswere found, identified as the ear-lier Astroni 6 eruption from the Campi Flegrei (Fondi basin) and the later AP2 eruption of the Somma-Vesuvius(Agro Pontino). The identification of the distal tephra layers rests upon a combination of criteria, including stra-tigraphy, macro characteristics, mineralogy, geochemical data on glass composition, Sr-isotopic ratios, and theknown tephrochronology for the period concerned, i.e. between c. 2500 and 1000 BCE. 14C datings serve to con-strain their age. No significant spatial variation in the characteristics of themain tephra layer (EU5)was observed,other than distinct fining with increasing distance from the vent. Based on a detailed palaeogeographical recon-struction, the occurrence and preservation of these tephra are explained by the local environmental conditionsgoverning their preservation during this time span (the Central Italian Bronze Age), and by the later evolutionof the area. The observations underpin that multiple corings are needed to fully assess whether sedimentaryhiatuses exist in palaeorecords, based on cores from sediment archives. Lastly, our study shows that hazard eval-uations for future eruptions by Campanian volcanoes should paymore attention to their potential impacts on dis-tal areas.

© 2020 The Authors. Published by Elsevier B.V. This is an open access article under the CC BY license (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/).

1. Introduction

Systematic study of distal tephra from the final phreatomagmaticphase of the Vesuvian Pomici di Avellino eruption (EU5, Sulpizio et al.,2008, 2010a and 2010b) is one of the main topics of the AvellinoEvent project. This project started in 2015 and focusses on the AgroPontino graben and nearby Fondi basin in southern Lazio (Fig. 1). It in-cludes a detailed reconstruction of the contemporary Early Bronze Agelandscape, based on a large set of corings, filling gaps in earlier coringdata sets (Sevink et al., 1984; Van Joolen, 2003; Feiken, 2014), and ondetailed study (tephrochronology, radiocarbon dating, palaeoecology)of specific sites (see Fig. 1 and Table 1).

In the interior low-lying part of the Agro Pontino, two major Holo-cene sedimentary complexes were distinguished (Sevink et al., 1984;van Gorp and Sevink, 2019; van Gorp et al., 2020): a coastal lagoonalsystem near Terracina with associated valley system of the Amasenoriver and a large inland lake with associated fluvio-deltaic system. In

[email protected] (W. van Gorp),(I. Arienzo).

. This is an open access article under

both complexes, in hundreds of corings a several centimetres thicktephra layer was found with quite uniform conspicuous fieldcharacteristics. This was the only major tephra layer encountered inthese complexes and had already been identified as distal EU5 tephraand 14C-dated at two sites by Sevink et al. (2011). In subsequent yearsit was also described by Sevink et al. (2013), Feiken (2014) and Bakelset al. (2015). In the Fondi basin, a similar situation was encountered(van Gorp and Sevink, 2019) with an inland lake and a small frontal la-goon holding this tephra layer (see also Doorenbosch and Field, 2019;vanGorp and Sevink, 2019). Fig. 2 shows the overall geology and poten-tial occurrence of the Avellino tephra layer, further referred to as theAV-layer.

The situation became more complex, when a second thinner tephralayer was found above the AV-layer in some corings in the south of theAgro Pontino, near Borgo Hermada. In the Fondi basin, the situationwasalso complex. At two sites double tephra layers were found of which theupper had the characteristics of the AV-layer and the lower, thinner andfiner textured layer thus should predate the AV-eruption and have anon-Vesuvian origin (e.g. Santacroce et al., 2008; Zanchetta et al.,2011). This was not truly surprising in the light of the presence in theMaccarese lagoon, further north near Rome, of Mid-Holocene tephra

the CC BY license (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/).

http://crossmark.crossref.org/dialog/?doi=10.1016/j.jvolgeores.2020.107041&domain=pdf

http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/



mailto:[email protected]






http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/journal/

www.elsevier.com/locate/jvolgeores

Fig. 1. Locations in theAgro Pontino and Fondi basin (shaded areas), and sites studied. Numbers refer to sites described in Table 1 (RC=site Ricci; CI= site Campo). A=higher complex ofPleistocene marine terraces; B = Agro Pontino graben; C = Monti Lepini; D = Monti Ausoni; E = Monte Circeo.

2 J. Sevink et al. / Journal of Volcanology and Geothermal Research 405 (2020) 107041

layers of Phlegraean origin (Jouannic et al., 2013), testifying to the dis-tribution of distal tephra from Campi Flegrei eruptions far to the NW.

In this paper, we present a detailed overview of the geochemical andpetrological characteristics of the AV-layer and its distribution in thetwo major coastal basins of Southern Lazio, and of the other distaltephra layers encountered. Results include a series of 14C datings. Wealso describe the spatial variability in the occurrence and compositionof the AV-layer and discuss the implications of our results fortephrostratigraphic studies of sediment cores from similar centralMed-iterranean environments. Lastly, we pay attention to hazards to whichmore remote distal areas may be exposed upon relatively minor erup-tive events in the Campi Flegrei and Vesuvius areas (Orsi et al., 2009;Cioni et al., 2008). These are not accounted for in the current hazardevaluation and emergency plans (Sulpizio et al., 2014).

2. General information

During the last glacial period, with very low sea level, in the AgroPontino and Fondi basin rivers cut deep valleys into a thick complex ofpredominantly fine-textured Quaternary sedimentary units (e.g.Sevink et al., 1984). Upon theHolocene sea level rise, these valleys grad-ually were filled in. Towards c. 2 ka BC, when sea level rise truly de-creased (Lambeck et al., 2011; Vacchi et al., 2016), beach ridges couldbuild up (Sevink et al., 1982, 1984, 2018; Van Gorp and Sevink, 2019;van Gorp et al., 2020). This created the low energy aquatic to semi-terrestrial environment that allowed for preservation of even thin distaltephra layers. Near the coast, these suited environments were mostlyfreshwater lagoons, which overall were shallow and underlain bysandy beach ridge deposits, while further inland the lagoons gradedinto marshy valleys. In the central part of the Agro Pontino basin a

different situation existed. Upon sea level rise the Amaseno river builtup an alluvial fan, which shortly before the AV-eruption started toblock the single outlet of the fluvial system that drained the northernpart of this basin, south of La Cotarda (Fig. 1). This led to a gradual‘drowning’ of the earlier inland landscape and created a large lake andassociated marshes (van Gorp and Sevink, 2019; van Gorp et al.,2020). In the NE part of this lake, peat with intercalated lacustrinemarls (calcareous gyttja) and some travertine accumulated, whereasin the SWpyritic black organic clayswere found. In theNW, these lacus-trine deposits graded into fluvio-deltaic sediments and, further up-stream, truly fluvial sediments. The waters that ran into the lake fromthe adjacent mountains were largely fed by springs with highly calcar-eous and often sulphuric waters.

The pattern in the Agro Pontino is depicted in Fig. 3 (after van Gorpand Sevink, 2019). A rather similar situation existed in the Fondi basin,where an inland lake formed with peats and calcareous gyttja. Largetracts of the Early Bronze Age landscape in both the Agro Pontino andthe Fondi basin were later covered by mostly fine textured fluvial andcolluvial deposits and by later peats (see Sevink et al., 1984; VanJoolen, 2003; Feiken, 2014). Thicknesses of this younger cover may belimited, in which case deep modern soil labour (often up to 50 cm andmore) has obliterated any intercalated tephra layers.

Based on the foregoing, a fairly detailed picture could be constructedof the sedimentary complexes that potentially hold distal Early BronzeAge and later tephra layers. Truly earlier Holocene tephra layers arevery unlikely to be found, with the possible exception of the deep fluvialincisions in which they potentially may occur, but in that case at greatdepths. The interior lake in the Agro Pontinomost probably only formedshortly before the Bronze Age and for that reason is unlikely to hold ear-lier Holocene tephra layers (e.g. Sevink et al., 2018).

Table 1General information on sites sampled and their main characteristics. Earlier studied sites are indicated in italics. Chem=Microprobe analyses; Micro = Thin sections; Text = Grain size analyses. AV = Avellino tephra. Facies: P = peat/peaty clay;A = anoxic, pyritic clay; G = calcareous gyttja; F = fluvio-deltaic sediment. For analyses: x = data available. 14C: (x) = unreliable dating. Chem: (x) = no glass.

Locations Sites (Fig. 1) Name/nr Coordinates site Depth/thickness/nature tephra layer Facies Pollen 14C Chem Micro Text Refer.

Agro PontinoMigliara 44.5 44.5 44.5 13.0139 41.4484 ca. 100 cm, 2 cm AV A x x x x

Sevink et al., 2011Campo inferiore Campo Campo 13.0525 41.4682 ca. 220 cm, 2 cm AV G/F/P x xMezzaluna 405 405 13.1195 41.4424 ca. 45 cm, 2–3 cm AV x x x x

Bakels et al., 2015Ricci Ricci Ricci 13.0374 41.4620 ca. 210 cm, 2–3 cm AV F x xTratturo Caniò 455 455 12.9937 41.4890 ca. 150 cm, 2–3 cm AV F x x Feiken, 2014

Frasso415 415 13.1456 41.3596 108 cm, 2 cm AV P x500 500 13.1462 41.3605 ca. 55 cm, 2 cm AV P x x x

Mesa504 504 13.1046 41.3948 44 cm, 2 cm AV A (x) x700 700 13.0998 41.4040 46 cm, 2 cm AV A x

Borgo Hermada

362 362 13.1575 41.3133 60 cm, 2 cm AV P x x x x601 601 13.1640 41.3209 60 cm, 2 cm AV G x (x)602 602 13.1701 41.3260 112 cm, 3 cm AV G x

Fondi

Femmina Morta 197197-U

13.3266 41.296852 cm, 3 cm AV P x x x x x

Doorenbosch and Field, 2019197-L 66 cm, 2 cm lower tephra P x x x x

Tumolillo 10051005-U

13.3715 41.286988 cm, 2–3 cm AV P x x (x)

1005-L 112 cm, 2 cm lower tephra P x xFondi inland 122 122 13.3951 41.3141 81 cm, 2 cm AV P x x x

Other

Ricci216 216 13.0331 41.4557 85 cm, 2 cm AV A (x)372 372 13.0270 41.4588 105 cm, 2 cm AV A x

Borgo Hermada

180 180-U 13.1749 41.3246 164 cm, 1 cm upper tephra G (x)181 181-U 13.1720 41.3249 190 cm, 1 cm upper tephra G x198 198-L 13.1717 41.3248 188 cm, 2 cm AV G x334 334 13.1385 41.3038 149 cm, 2 cm AV P x

La Cotarda399 399 13.1396 41.3997 44 cm, 2 cm AV A x508 508 13.1332 41.4045 70 cm, 2 cm AV P x

3J.Sevink

etal./JournalofVolcanology

andGeotherm

alResearch405

(2020)107041

Fig. 2. Simplified geological map of the Agro Pontino and Fondi basin, also showing the potential tephra distribution (shaded areas), after Van Gorp and Sevink (2019).


3. Materials and methods

Basically, the identification of tephra layers encountered in thecoastal basins studied and their origin hinges on five criteria: 1) field(macro) characteristics, 2) stratigraphy of the section concerned,3) chemical composition (glass shards), 4) age constraints based on14C dating, and 5) isotopic composition (minerals and glass). Inciden-tally, archaeological dating can be used as an additional criterion fortheir age, notably at Tratturo Caniò and Ricci (Fig. 1), both with Earlyto Early Middle Bronze Age ceramics directly above the tephra layer(Feiken, 2014; Bakels et al., 2015). Methods described below pertainto the field criteria (1 and 2) and to the laboratory (3, 4, and 5). Analyt-ical techniques are described in brief. Details are given as Supplementalinformation. Archaeological data have been published elsewhere and,where relevant, reference will be made to those publications.

3.1. Selection of sites and sampling

In the area indicated in Fig. 2 as potentially holding the AV-layer alarge number of hand corings was carried out to assess the characteris-tics of the Holocene sedimentary fill, including the occurrence of tephralayers. Transitions from the Holocene unripe and often highly organicsediments, lacking any trace of soil formation, to the Pleistocene densesediments with strong soil formation are very prominent and abrupt,

allowing for easy distinction between these sediments (see e.g. vanGorp et al., 2020). Maximumdepths reached by hand corings in the Ho-locene fills of the deeper river incisions were in the order of 10 m, oftennot touching the Pleistocene basis. Outside these incisions the thicknessof the fill was generally limited to less than a fewmetres and its stratig-raphy could be established in detail.

An important purpose of the coring programwas to identify potentialsiteswithwell-preserved tephra layers that, togetherwith already knownand studied sites (e.g. Migliara 44.5 and Campo inferiore, Sevink et al.,2011), could provide a full picture of the tephra in the Agro Pontino gra-ben and Fondi basin. Additional selection criteria were their suitabilityfor palaeoecological studies and 14C dating. Earlier studied and newly se-lected sites are indicated in Fig. 1 and listed in Table 1.

Sequences at newly selected siteswere sampledwith a six-centimetrediameter gauge corer (always multiple cores) or by taking a large mono-lith in a pit. Undisturbed samples were packed in plastic and stored in acool environment till transport to the laboratory at Leiden, TheNetherlands, where they were kept in a refrigerator or cold room.

3.2. Geochemical, petrological and geochronological analyses

Thin sections of undisturbed samples for microscopic study wereproduced at the RCE (Amersfoort, The Netherlands) by impregnationwith resin, followed by cutting and polishing to a thickness of c.

Fig. 3. Landscape Southern Lazio c. 2000 BCE. Agro Pontino: coastal lake (2) and inland lake (1), with oxic (Lo) and anoxic (La) lacustrine sediments, and shaded transitional zone; fluvio-deltaic sediments (F); Pleistocene deposits (Pt). Fondi basin: oxic lacustrine sediments (Lo); fluvio-deltaic and alluvial sediments (F/A). B=beach ridges.M=Mediterranean Sea. Arrowsindicate former river courses. For details on Pleistocene deposits: see Fig. 2. Tentative boundary indicated with ———–.

5J. Sevink et al. / Journal of Volcanology and Geothermal Research 405 (2020) 107041

30 μm. Polished sections for microprobe analysis were produced by theGeoLab of the University of Utrecht (Utrecht, The Netherlands), usingresin impregnated undisturbed samples or resin-embedded pumicefragments that were hand-picked from fractions >63 μm. These frac-tions were obtained by wet sieving, following on treatment with 5%H2O2 to remove organic matter and by 5% HCl to remove carbonates.Both thin sections and size fractions were studied using a petrographicmicroscope.

3.2.1. Chemical analysesMicroprobe analyseswere performed at theHP-HT Laboratory of Ex-

perimental Volcanology and Geophysics of the Istituto Nazionale diGeofisica e Vulcanologia at Rome (Italy), using a Cameca SX50 electronmicroprobe equipped with five wavelength-dispersive spectrometersusing 15 kV accelerating voltage, 15 nA beam current, 10 Am beam di-ameter, and 20 s counting time. In some cases, glass in thin sectionswas deeply altered and therefore not all samples were analysed.

3.2.2. Isotopic analysesSr isotopic compositions were determined onminerals >63 μm sep-

arated from the corresponding size fractions, pretreated as describedabove. The analyses concern a selection of tephra layers that were iden-tified in the field, with particular attention for tephra layers above andbelow the presumed AV-tephra layer. Analyses were performed byThermal Ionization Mass Spectrometry at the Istituto Nazionale diGeofisica e Vulcanologia, Osservatorio Vesuviano at Napoli, using aThermoFinnigan Triton TI multicollector mass spectrometer. Theanalysed samples are from the Femmina Morta (Upper and Lowertephra), Ricci, and several Borgo Hermada sites (Fig. 1).

3.2.3. Radiocarbon datingFor 14C analysis of samples from immediately above and below

tephra layers, plant macro remains were hand-picked under themicro-scope from subsamples that were obtained by sieving over a 105 or150 μm mesh sieve to remove fines. In the selection of plant macro re-mains, distinction was made between plant remains from terrestrialplants and from plants growing in marshy to aquatic conditions butobtaining their carbon from the air. Remains from plants that poten-tially obtained their carbon dioxide from the water were excluded. In

some instances, suited plant macro remains were absent and humicsoilmaterial (black organic claywith veryfinely divided organicmatter)was used. For 14C analyses, samples were subjected to the ABA pre-treatment, followed by their dating using the AMS-method, at the CIOlab in Groningen, The Netherlands. Values obtained are presented as14C years BP, and as calibrated ages BC using the OxCal4.3 softwarepackage (Bronk Ramsey, 2017) and the IntCal 13 calibration curve.

3.2.4. Particle size distributionParticle size distributions were established by means of a Laser par-

ticle sizer (Helos KR Sympatec) at the Free University (Amsterdam).Samples were dispersed following pre-treatment with H2O2 and HClto remove organic matter and calcium carbonate. Details are given asSupplemental information.

4. Results

4.1. Field observations and sampling

In the basins studied, four types of sedimentary environments weredistinguished (van Gorp and Sevink, 2019): 1) oxic aquatic to marshywith peat to peaty clay; 2) anoxic marshy, with pyritic more or lesspeaty black clays (‘pyritic clays’); 3) oxic aquatic (lacustrine/lagoonal),with calcareous gyttjas to calcareous marls (‘gyttja’); 4) oxic, deltaic tofluvial, with calcareous clays to loams. The AV-layer was identified inthe field as a 2–3 cm thick tephra layer with a sandy texture and agreyish-creamy colour, holding very conspicuous idiomorphic ‘golden’mica and sanidine crystals, of which the mica reached sizes up to c.4 mm. Where the tephra layer was intercalated in gyttja (such as inthe interior basin of the Agro Pontino nearMezzaluna and in the coastallagoonal deposits near Borgo Hermada, see Fig. 1), or in pyritic clays, itformed a virtually continuous horizontal layer with often sharp upperand lower boundaries, which could be followed over large distances. In-tercalated in peat (marsh vegetation), it wasmore fragmentary and hada more variable thickness, such as at Femmina Morta (Fig. 1). However,the overall characteristics – a centimetres thick, greyish-creamy sandytephra layer with conspicuous large mica – were invariable.

In many places the AV-layer was encountered at a depth of less than1 m below the ground surface. In the dry summer period, the


groundwater level was generally deeper, due to deep artificial drainagestarting in the thirties of the 20th century. In such cases, in peaty sedi-ments bioturbation and mineralisation had significantly modified theoriginal sediment characteristics, evidenced by abundant faunal excre-ments and biopores (mostly from earthworms), while plant macro re-mains were scarce. Pyritic clays had often been oxidized with theconcurrent development of acid sulphate soils, marked by the presenceof yellowish jarosite mottling, gypsum, and iron hydroxide mottles andconcretions (Dent, 1986; Sevink, 2020). Non-affected AV-layers wereencountered where the groundwater level was still high or where thelayer was at greater depth (e.g. below a thick layer of fluvio-colluvialsediment and in the fills of the fluvial incisions near Borgo Hermadaand in the Fondi basin).

Younger tephra was only found in the fills of fluvial incisions nearBorgo Hermada in the form of a thin (c. 1 cm at maximum) fine sandygreyish layer that was intercalated in gyttja and recognized as tephraby its colour (greyish) and by the mica. It occurred a few decimetresabove the AV-layer, but below any reddish-brown Early Iron Age oryounger colluvial deposit (see above and Fig. 2) and was never encoun-tered in the gyttja deposits of the central lake in the Agro Pontino, nor inthe Holocene fills of the Fondi basin.

In coastal lagoonal sections in the Fondi basin, we found an oldertephra layer, which occurred as a discontinuous, several centimetresthick, greyish fine sandy layer at about 20 cm below the AV-layer. Else-where, such as in the interior Fondi basin or in the Agro Pontino, wenever encountered such older tephra layer.

General information on the sites sampled is listed in Table 1, whilesampling locations are indicated in Fig. 1. In Table 1, the younger tephralayer is indicated with UT (upper tephra), while older tephra layer is in-dicated as LT (lower tephra).

4.2. Thin sections and mineralogy of fractions >63 μm

4.2.1. AV-layersIn the thin sections, these layers were invariably found to consist of

tephra and of smaller or larger amounts of other, non-pyroclastic mate-rials, which included clay to sand-size clastic material, well conservedplant fragments, and fossils with an amorphous silica skeleton (diatoms

Fig. 4.AV-tephra layer atMezzaluna (site 105). A) tephra:mostly pumice, feldspar, pyroxene (Pnicols; C) thin section with tephra layer. LB = Lower boundary; UB = Upper boundary of teph

and sponge spicules). Additionally, some contained fossils with a calcar-eous skeleton and secondary carbonates (as concretions or finely di-vided lime). Where deposited in an anoxic environment, theyfurthermore held some to abundant small framboid pyrite aggregates,but generally thesewere oxidized to still more or less framboid iron hy-droxide aggregates. The tephra largely consisted of pumice with in-cluded small phenocrysts, with in addition smaller amounts offeldspar (mostly sanidine), clinopyroxene and biotite. Other regularlyencountered minerals were melanite and diopside. This mineralogicalcompositionwas rather invariable and in conformancewith the compo-sition described for proximal tephra from this eruptive phase (see e.g.Sulpizio et al., 2008; Sulpizio et al., 2010a).

The mineralogy of the fractions >63 μm was found to be very uni-form, with pumice, feldspar, clinopyroxene, and mica as the main com-ponents, similar to the AV-tephra in the thin sections. Material otherthan tephrawas hardly encountered in this fraction, apart from inciden-tal larger sized iron concretions and rare quartz and chert grains, de-rived from older marine and aeolian deposits.

The AV-tephra layers thus ranged from relatively pure pyroclasticmaterial to layers of rather mixed origin, as also described inSection 4.6. Boundaries between the tephra layer and sediments aboveand below were rarely abrupt at microscopic scale. Fig. 4 shows thetephra at Mezzaluna (site 405) that was deposited in a lacustrine envi-ronment with prominent accumulation of calcareous gyttja. This isreflected by the crystic plasmic fabric and abundant calcareous fossils(see Fig. 4A and B). As shown by Fig. 4C its upper boundary is abrupt,while below it is more gradual. In Fig. 5A an example is given of anAV-layer in peat (Frasso, site 500), illustrating the often rather irregularshape and discontinuous nature of this layer. Fig. 5B and C illustrate thealternation of pyroclastic material and plant fragments that character-izes the AV- layer. Additionally, in these figures the pumice fragmentswith their included phenocrysts and the clinopyroxenes are very wellvisible. Fig. 5D shows the extremely fine layering of the peat above thetephra layer as well as the irregular distribution of tephra particles,which also occur as isolated individual grains.

At FemminaMorta, the AV-tephra (site 197, sample 197-U) was de-posited under rather similar conditions, i.e. in a marshy vegetation.Here, similar to the Frasso site 500, the upper and lower boundary are

) and somemelanite (M) in amatrix of crystic plasma. F= fossil; B) as A) butwith crossedra layer indicated with ———.

Fig. 5.AV-tephra layer in peat at Frasso (site 500): A) thin sectionwith irregular shapedupper boundary (UB); LB=Lower boundary; B) alternation of tephra andpeat; C) as B) but crossednicols; D) finely stratified peat above the tephra layer.


relatively gradual and discontinuous (see Fig. 6A) and the tephra layercontains common diatoms and sponge spicules. Fig. 6A illustrates thedense packing of the AV-layer and a characteristic larger mica crystal(most probably phlogopite). At the Mesa site 700, where the tephrawas deposited in an anoxic environment, the upper and lower bound-aries are also irregular (see Fig. 7A). The oxidized pyrite shows up asblack to dark brown material above the AV-layer and holds some gyp-sum pseudomorphs. Moreover, it contains truly abundant sponge spic-ules (see Fig. 7B).

4.2.2. Other tephra layersThe lower tephra layer at Femmina Morta (site 197, sample 197-L)

was distinctly finer textured and less rich in pumice than the AV-layer, as evidenced by Fig. 6C and D. The figures additionally showthat angular mineral fragments are common, largely consisting of feld-spar (sanidine), and that the layer is discontinuous.

The upper tephra layer encountered near Borgo Hermada (sites 180and 181) was too thin to allow for the production of a thin section inwhich the composition of this tephra could be reliably studied. How-ever, study of the size fractions >63 μm showed that composition wassimilar to that of the AV-layer.

4.3. Chemical composition of the glasses

Samples analysed by microprobe are listed in Table 1. In a fair num-ber of samples, glass appeared to be completely altered and fresh glassfragments were absent. In this table, they are indicated with (x). Inone sample from the Fondi basin (197-L) glass shards were rare andfor these only a limited number of microprobe analyses could be per-formed. The full set of chemical analyses can be found as Supplementaldata, together with a TAS classification diagram inwhich all samples fallwithin the phonolite field, for which reason we refrain from presentingand discussing such TAS diagram.

In Figs. 8, 9, and 12, chemical data are presented in FeO vs SiO2 andCaO vs SiO2 diagrams, which are particularly useful for discriminatingthe compositionally rather similar volcanic rocks from the Neapolitanvolcanoes (Sulpizio et al., 2010c; Zanchetta et al., 2011). The data arepresented together with the chemical composition of glass from tephraerupted from the Neapolitan volcanoes between ca. 2.5 (distinctly be-fore the AV-eruption) and 1.0 ka BC (before the deposition of thecolluvio-alluvial deposits, linked to early agriculture, e.g. Attema,2017). Literature data for the relevant eruptions that occurred in thetime span mentioned have been plotted as coloured fields for compari-son with our data (Fig. 8). They include products of the following erup-tions: AV and AP (between AV and Pompei; Di Vito et al., 2013) fromSomma-Vesuvius (Andronico and Cioni, 2002; Santacroce et al., 2008;Sulpizio et al., 2008, 2010c), and Agnano-Monte Spina, Astroni andCapo Miseno from Campi Flegrei (Tonarini et al., 2009 and referencestherein; Arienzo et al., 2010 and references therein, Smith et al., 2011;Jouannic et al., 2013; Arienzo et al., 2016; Margaritelli et al., 2016).

Fig. 8 highlights that our samples form three clusters. Samples 197-U, 122 and 198-L, from the Femmina Morta, Fondi inland, and BorgoHermada locations, plot in the field built on Avellino literature data.Sample 181-U from Borgo Hermada is marked by high FeO contentswith respect to all other analysed samples and resembles the first APeruptions. Glasses from the lowest tephra layers from Tumulillo andFemmina Morta (1005-L and 197-L) plot in the field of the Agnano-Monte Spina and Astroni glasses.

4.3.1. Fondi basinAt Femmina Morta (site 197) an upper and a lower tephra layer

were found of which the upper exhibited the field characteristics ofthe AV-layer (see Section 4.1). This upper tephra (sample 197-U) isphonolitic in composition and in terms of major elements is similar tothe Avellino glasses, as highlighted by the Total Alkali vs. Silica data(not shown) and by the FeO vs SiO2 diagram (Fig. 8). In Fig. 9A, our

Fig. 6. Tephra layers in peat at Femmina Morta (site 197): A) thin section AV-layer (197-U); B) detail of AV-layer with mica crystal.; C) thin section Astroni 6-layer (197-L); D) detail ofAstroni 6-layer with abundant angular feldspar.


samples fall in the AV EU3-EU5 fields. They have a CaO content ofaround 2 wt%, while SiO2 varies from 51 to 58 wt%. Samples 197-U-1,-2 and -3 are from the upper, middle and lower part of the AV-layerand were analysed to assess whether temporal variation exists in thecomposition of this layer. The results point to absence of such variation.For the lower tephra layer (sample 197-L) only two analyses could beperformed on glass shards and these are trachytic in composition. The

Fig. 7. AV-tephra layer in peat at Mesa (site 700): A) thin section; B) detail

high silica content (Fig. 9B) is likely due to the relatively low sum ofmajor oxides (less than 94%), which in the calculation of the total ele-ment contents on anhydrous basis significantly increases the contentof the most abundant element (SiO2). Henceforth, the upper layer(197-U) can be attributed to the Avellino eruption, whereas the lowerlayer (197-L) falls in the proximity of the Astroni/Agnano-MonteSpina field.

of pyritic sediment above the AV-layer with abundant sponge spicules.

Fig. 8.Diagrams showing FeO versus SiO2 percentages for glass shards from various tephralayers and relevant compositional fields. 197-U-1/2/3/= samples of top/centre/bottom ofthe AV-layer; 197-U = second sample from the AV-layer; 1005-L core 1 = sample fromfirst core; 1005-L core 2 = sample from second core.

Fig. 9. CaO versus SiO2 diagrams for: A) Samples 197-U and 197-U-1/2/3, 198-L, 122plotted together with literature data for glasses of AV eruption products; B) Samples1005-L core 2, 1005 – L core 1, 197-L plotted together with literature data for glasses ofAstroni, Capo Miseno and Agnano-Monte Spina eruption products; C) Sample 181-Uplotted together with literature data for glasses of products of the AP eruptions.


At Tumolillo (site 1005), in the coastal area towards Sperlonga, twocoreswere studied, bothwith two tephra layers of which the upperwasidentified as the AV-layer based on its field characteristics. Glass shardsfrom this tephra layer have been sampled, but due to the absence of un-altered glass shards it was impossible to analyse the chemical composi-tion by electron microprobe. Results for glass shards from the lowertephra in core 1 (1005-L-1) and core 2 (1005-L-2) indicate that theyare trachy-phonolitic. In Fig. 9B they overlap the Astroni 3, 6, CapoMiseno, and Agnano Monte Spina glass compositions. CaO varies fromabout 3.5 to 2 wt%, and SiO2 from about 58 to 62 wt%.

At Fondi inland (site 122) the tephra layer observed was identifiedas the AV-layer based on its field characteristics. In terms of chemicalcomposition, glass shards from this layer are phonolitic and similar tosamples 197-U and 197-U-1/2/3 (Figs. 8, 9A). In otherwords, their com-position is similar to that of glass from the AV-eruption.

4.3.2. Agro Pontino basinAttempts to analyse glass shards from tephra layers at Ricci (site

216) and Mesa (site 700), both identified as AV-layer on the basis oftheir field characteristics, failed because the samples studied did notcontain fresh glass shards. For the Borgo Hermada area (see Fig. 1)tephra layers from two cores (sites 181 and 198) were studied, whilein the core at site 180 glass was found to be absent in the tephra layer.In core 181 two tephra layers were encountered, of which the lowerwas identified as the AV-layer based on its field characteristics. Glassshards from the upper tephra layer have been analysed (sample 181-U). In the TAS diagram (not shown; see Supplementary data) they

plot in the phonolite field close to the tephrite-phonolite/phonoliteboundary. The stratigraphic position (above the AV-tephra layer), theNa2O/K2O vs SiO2 (not shown; see Supplementary data), the FeO vsSiO2, and the CaO vs SiO2 diagrams (Figs. 8 and 9C) allow for its attribu-tion to the post-AV events of the Somma-Vesuvius. This is confirmed bythe results for site 198, in which the lower tephra (sample 198-L) is analkali-rich phonolite compositionally similar to samples 197-U, 197-U-1/2/3, 122, and its glasses plot within the compositional field of theAV-tephra.

Fig. 10. Strontium isotopic ratios for some samples from the Agro Pontino and Fondi basin,and literature-based ratios for relevant tephra eruptions.


4.4. Isotope composition

In Fig. 10 results for the samples analysed are graphically presented,while analytical results are also presented as Supplementary data. TheSr isotope composition of feldspars from the Femmina Morta upperand lower tephra (197-U and 197-L) are similar (c. 0.7073) and are inthe range of data obtained forminerals and glass from both the Avellinoand Astroni erupted products (Civetta et al., 1991; Tonarini et al., 2009;Arienzo et al., 2015; unpublished data by Arienzo). Another aliquot offeldspars and the clinopyroxenes from sample 197-L have 87Sr/86Sr ra-tios of c. 0.7074 and 0.7073, respectively. Feldspars from the Ricci site216, where the occurrence of AV-tephra was hypothesized based onfield characteristics of the intercalated tephra layer, have slightly higher87Sr/86Sr ratios (0.7075) than the feldspars from 197-L. These isotopecompositions are still within the range for Avellino products.

Comparing our results with those on the various relevant eruptionstaken from the literature, it is evident that Sr-isotopic compositions donot allow for discrimination between the Somma-Vesuvius and CampiFlegrei eruptions that occurred within the studied time span. However,they clearly demonstrate that an Ischia origin of these tephra can beruled out since isotope compositions of the Ischia volcanics (bulkrocks, glasses and minerals) are in the range of 0.7050 to 0.7069 (e.g.Petrini et al., 2001; D'Antonio et al., 2007, 2013; Iovine et al., 2017a,2017b, 2018 and references therein), i.e. they are less enriched in radio-genic Sr relative to volcanic material from the Campi Flegrei andSomma-Vesuvius.

4.5. 14C dating

In Table 2 results are presented for all sites studied. Earlier datings onrelevant sites - Migliara 44.5 (44.5), Campo Inferiore (Campo), Ricci(Ricci), Mezzaluna (405), and Tratturo Caniò (455) - are in italics. Inthis table, the data on the nature of the samples evidences the some-times very low content of suited plant macro remains, both in earliersections (44.5) and in new sections (700). For these sites, humic clayhad to be used for dating given the absence of such suited remains.Some sections near Borgo Hermana (362, 601, 602) did not containany suited plant macro remains or humic clay above or below thatAV-layer and therefore could not be analysed.

The upper (post-AV) tephra layers at Borgo Hermada (sites 180 and181) were in unsuited sediment (gyttja) and did not contain reliableplant macro remains. By contrast, for the lower tephra layer occurringat Femmina Morta (sample 197-L) and Tumolillo (1005-L) suitedplant macro remains were found. The ages obtained for Femmina

Morta (197-L) are quite remarkable, being virtually identical for all sam-ples dated (1, 2, 3, and 5), for which reason sampling was repeated andnew datings were performed on Cladium mariscus seeds. The new agesobtained are strikingly similar to the earlier datings, performed on othermacro plant materials. At Tumolillo, datings for the lower tephra layerare 3720 ± 25 BP (below) and 3765 ± 25 BP (above) (Table 2),constraining the age of this layer to 2201–2053 cal BC (95.4%probability).

Table 3 provides an overview of the AV-layer related samples. Sam-ples from below this layer are similar in radiocarbon age, with the ex-ception of Femmina Morta (site 197). Excluding the latter dating, themean age is c. 3570 BP. Ages obtained for samples from above exhibita far wider age range: For the sites 44.5 and Campo ages are distinctlyhigher than the mean age obtained for the samples from below theAV-layer, whereas the ages for Mesa site 700 and Borgo Hermada site362 are distinctly younger (3085 and 3415 BP).

4.6. Grain size analyses

Fig. 11 shows the location of the siteswhere tephrawas sampled andthe median grain sizes for the various samples. Median values for 44.5and Campo are from Sevink et al. (2011). The values exhibit a gradualfiningwith increasing distance to the Somma-Vesuvius. In Fig. 11, in ad-dition, grain size distributions are presented for a series of tephra sam-ples, demonstrating this gradual shift in median values. These graphsinclude samples from nearly pure tephra (405 and 334) and fromtephra in clayey sediment (399 and 508). The earlier tephra fromFemmina Morta (197-L) is distinctly less sorted and finer textured. Afull set of grain size analyses is presented as Supplemental data.

5. Discussion

5.1. Identification of the tephra layers

Field characteristics of all tephra layers studied and indicated as ‘AV’in Table 1 were a centimetres thick greyish-creamy sandy tephra layerwith conspicuous mica and abundant mineral fragments. Whenevermore than one tephra layer is encountered, evidently the well-established Mid to Late Holocene tephrochronostratigraphy for CentralItaly can be used (see e.g. Santacroce et al., 2008; Giaccio et al., 2009;Zanchetta et al., 2011; Jouannic et al., 2013; Jung, 2017). Relevant arethose eruptions that date between c. 2500 and c. 1000 BCE. The lowerlimit is based on the available 14C datings, the second, upper timelimit on the dating of the onset of massive deposition of colluvio-alluvial sediments in the Agro Pontino and Fondi basin (see VanJoolen, 2003; Feiken, 2014; Attema, 2017). Given these time constraints,relevant eruptions for our area of study are the larger Campanian ones,for which chemical data are presented in the Figs. 8 and 9. Other moreremote major volcanoes have been active in this period, such as the Is-chia and Etna volcanoes, but the chemical and isotopic composition oftheir tephra differs from that of the tephra we found. Moreover, tephrafrom these other volcanoes and dating from the studied time span hasnever been reported for Southern Lazio (see e.g. Jouannic et al., 2013;Margaritelli et al., 2016).

The chemical composition of volcanic glasses from the various rele-vant Campanian eruptions is well known and can be readily used, incase that field macro characteristics and stratigraphy are insufficientto distinguish between tephra from the Somma-Vesuvius and CampiFlegrei. Results for the samples studied are presented in Fig. 8, togetherwith literature data (Wulf et al., 2004; Santacroce et al., 2008; Sulpizioet al., 2008, 2010c; Tonarini et al., 2009; Arienzo et al., 2010, 2016;Smith et al., 2011; Jouannic et al., 2013; Margaritelli et al., 2016). Thedata demonstrate that glasses from the AV-tephra that we analysedhave a very similar chemical composition, which is in line with the ho-mogeneous mineralogical composition of the tephra layers that we ob-served, both in the field and in thin section. AV glasses are characterized

Table 2Overview of radiocarbon datings for the sites from the Agro Pontino and Fondi basin. Earlier published datings are in italics.

Locations Site Description of sample Material Sample number CIO Age BP Delta13C

Calibrated age References

Agro PontinoMigliara 44.5 44.5 Top layer 4, above AV-tephra layer Black humic clay/peat GrA-46206, 46208 3635 +/− 25 −27.75 2126–1923 cal BC Sevink et al., 2011

Base layer 4, above tephra layer Black humic clay/peat GrA-46203, 46205 3685 +/− 25 −27.10 2189–1978 cal BCTop layer 2, below AV-tephra layer Black humic clay/peat GrA-46200, 46201 3565 +/− 25 −27.79 2014–1781 cal BC

Campo inferiore Campo Above AV-tephra layer Wood fragment from peat GrA-46210 3610 +/− 30 −28.98 2110–1889 cal BC Sevink et al., 2011Above tephra layer Wood fragment from peat GrN-32454 3635 +/− 40 −27.58 2135–1896 cal BCBelow AV-tephra layer Tree leaves GrA-45134, 45265, 45266 3585+/− 20 −29.49 2016–1886 cal BCBelow tephra layer Wood: thick branch GrA-45003, 45006, 45256,

452573565 +/− 20 −24.94 2009–1826 cal BC

Below tephra layer Tree trunk: outer 2–5 rings GrA-45042, 45032, 45254,45255

3715 +/− 15 −27.49 2195–2036 cal BC

Below tephra layer Tree trunk: core GrA-45007, 45008, 45259,45260

3690 +/− 15 −27.07 2136–2031 cal BC

Ricci Ricci Wood in EBA II or MBA I vessel Wood GrA-51750 3445 +/− 35 −26.94 1881–1665 cal BC Bakels et al., 2015At 218 cm (AV-tephra layer: 211 cm) Alnus seed and catkin GrA-56630 3600 +/− 45 No result 2131–1780 cal BCBelow AV-tephra layer: burnt patch of peat Charcoal terrestrial plants GrA-56678 3640 +/− 35 −28.12 2135–1912 cal BCAt 248 cm (AV-tephra layer: 211 cm) Schoenoplectus seeds GrA-56801 3885 +/− 35 −25.99 2471–2214 cal BC

Tratturo Caniò 455 Layer 5001 (above AV-tephra layer) Charcoal terrestrial plants GrA-44910 3495 +/− 45 −25.56 1936–1693 cal BC Feiken et al., 2012Mezzaluna 405 Tree trunk from immediately below gyttja Wood GrA-51749 3565 +/− 35 −27.16 2023–1776 cal BC Bakels et al., 2015

Tree trunk from immediately below gyttja Wood: Alnus (outer tree rings) GrM-17418 3735 +/− 25 −26.36 2205–2036 cal BCFrasso 500 Above AV-tephra layer (within 2 cm) Wood (twig) GrM-17223 3505 +/− 25 −25.66 1897–1749 cal BC

Above AV-tephra layer (within 2 cm) Charred seeds terrestrial plants GrM-17840 3365 +/− 40 −21.36 1749–1532 cal BCBelow AV-tephra layer (within 2 cm) Wood (twig) GrM-17225 3530 +/− 25 −25.09 1935–1771 cal BCBelow AV-tephra layer (within 2 cm) Charred seeds terrestrial plants GrM-17226 3610 +/− 25 −26.83 2031–1897 cal BC

Mesa 700 Black peat/clay, 0–1 cm above AV-tephra layer Black humic clay GrM-17888 3085 +/− 35 −27.69 1749–1532 cal BCBlack peat/clay, 0–3 cm below AV-tephra layer Black humic clay GrM-17495 3590 +/− 25 −27.60 2022–1887 cal BC

Borgo Hermada 362 BE 362 57–58 cm, tephra (AV) at 60–62 cm Schoenoplectus lacustris seeds GrM-17231 3415 +/− 25 −23.60 1861–1639 cal BC601 601–1 70–73 cm: AV-tephra at 60–61 cm Twig/leaf GrM-17890 210 +/− 40 −29.40 unreliable602 602–1121–127 cm: AV-tephra at 112–115 cm Schoenoplectus lacustris seeds GrM-17907 3570 +/− 25 −27.76 2017–1784 cal BC

FondiFemmina Morta 197 FM 7 42–50 cm: Above AV-tephra layer (52–54 cm) Corylus/Viburnum wood GrA-67046 3380 +/− 35 −27.88 1762–1562 cal BC Doorenbosch and Field, 2019

FM 5 54–56 cm: Below AV-tephra layer (52–54 cm) Leaf fragment of terrestrial plant GrM-16626 3495 +/− 25 −26.01 1891–1746 cal BCFM 5 54–56 cm: Below AV-tephra layer (52–54 cm) Cladium mariscus seeds GrM-18970 3488 +/− 25 −25.59 1887–1744 calBCFM 3 64–66 cm: Above Astr-tephra layer (66–68 cm) Wood and Cladium mariscus seeds GrM-16625 3510 +/− 25 −25.68 1906–1751 cal BCFM 3 64–66 cm: Above Astr-tephra layer (66–68 cm) Cladium mariscus seeds GrM-18971 3528 +/− 25 −23.94 1932–1770 cal BCFM 2 68–70 cm: Below Astr-tephra layer (66–68 cm) Cladium mariscus seeds GrM-16624 3525 +/− 35 −27.12 1943–1751 cal BCFM 2 68–70 cm: Below Astr-tephra layer (66–68 cm) Cladium mariscus seeds GrM-18972 3532 +/− 25 −23.73 1939–1771 cal BCFM 1 70–78 cm: Below Astr-tephra layer (66–68 cm) Quercus twig GrA-68587 3535 +/− 35 −30.67 1956–1751 cal BC

Tumolillo 1005 90–91 cm: Below AV-tephra (88–90 cm) Cladium mariscus seeds GrM-16620 3550 +/− 30 −24.71 2009–1772 cal BC90–91 cm: Below AV-tephra (88–90 cm) Charcoal terrestrial plants GrM-17417 3570 +/− 25 −25.15 2017–1784 cal BC111–112 cm: Above Astr-tephra (112–114 cm) Lycopus europaus, Cladium mariscus seeds GrM-16621 3765 +/− 25 −26.97 2286–2057 cal BC114–115 cm: Below Astr-tephra (112–114 cm) Lycopus europaus, Cladium mariscus seeds GrM-16622 3720 +/− 25 −26.66 2199–2035 cal BC

Fondi inland 122 122A 79–80 cm: Above AV-tephra (81–83 cm) Large Schoenoplectus lacustris seed GrM-17887 3500 +/− 50 −29.40 1947–1691 cal BC122A 83–84 cm: Below AV-tephra (81–83 cm) Charcoal terrestrial plants GrM 17227 3555 +/− 25 −26.58 2007–1776 cal BC122A 85–86 cm: Below AV-tephra (81–83 cm) Charcoal terrestrial plants GrM 17228 3580 +/− 25 −25.79 2022–1882 cal BC

11J.Sevink

etal./JournalofVolcanology

andGeotherm

alResearch405

(2020)107041

Table 3Radiocarbon datings (non-calibrated ages) for samples from below and above the AV-layer.

Locations Name/number Below tephra layer Age BP s.d. Material

Agro PontinoMigliara 44.5 44.5 Top layer 2, below tephra layer 3565 25 Org. matterCampo inferiore Campo Below tephra layer 3585 20 Tree leavesMezzaluna 405 Tree trunk from immediately below gyttja 3565 35 Bark tree trunk

Frasso 500Below tephra layer (within 2 cm) 3530 25 WoodBelow tephra layer (within 2 cm) 3610 25 Charred seeds

Mesa 700 Black peat/clay, 0–3 cm below tephra layer (C2) 3590 25 Org. matter

Fondi

Femmina Morta 197FM 5 54–56 cm: below tephra layer (52–54 cm) 3495 25 Leaf fragmentFM 5 54–56 cm: below tephra layer (52–54 cm) 3488 25 Seeds

Tumolillo 1005Tumolillo 90–91 cm: below tephra (88–90 cm) 3550 30 SeedsTumolillo 90–91 cm: below tephra (88–90 cm) 3570 25 Charcoal

Fondi 122 122Fondi 122A 83–84 cm: below tephra (81–83 cm) 3555 25 CharcoalFondi 122A 85–86 cm: below tephra (81–83 cm) 3580 25 Charcoal

Locations Name/number Above tephra layer Age BP s.d. Material

Agro PontinoMigliara 44.5 44.5 Base layer 4, above tephra layer 3685 25 Org. matterCampo inferiore Campo Above tephra layer 3635 40 WoodRicci Ricci Wood in EBA II or MBA I vessel 3445 35 WoodTratturo Caniò 455 Layer 5001 (above tephra layer) 3495 45 CharcoalFrasso 500 Above tephra layer (within 2 cm) 3505 25 WoodMesa 700 Black peat/clay, 0–1 cm above tephra layer 3085 35 Org. matterBorgo Hermada 362 362 BE 362 57–58 cm, tephra (AV) at 60–62 cm 3415 25 Seeds

FondiFemmina Morta 197 FM 7 42–50 cm: above tephra layer (52–54 cm) 3380 35 WoodFondi inland 122 Fondi 122A 79–80 cm: above tephra (81–83 cm) 3500 50 Charcoal


by low FeO content relative to the AP glasses. The largest differences arewith the later AP eruptions (AP3–6), but these tephra are not relevantfor our study, since the AP3–6 eruptions are distinctly younger thanthe upper time limit of 1000 BCE (see e.g. Santacroce et al., 2008).

In most cases, we could readily obtain additional evidence (otherthan field macro characteristics and stratigraphy) for the nature of the

Fig. 11. Location of sites for which grain size of the AV-layer has been established and their mincreasing distance.

tephra layers (AV, Lower or Upper Tephra with respect to AV) encoun-tered in the various sections, such as their radiocarbon age. Sites forwhich 14C dating was impossible include Borgo Hermada site 601 andthe sites listed under ‘Other’ in Table 1. Among the latter are the BorgoHermada sites 180 and 181, at which the post-AV tephra layer encoun-tered (samples 180-U and 181-U) could not be radiocarbon dated (for

edian grain size (between brackets). Right: Histograms illustrating the fining trend with

Fig. 12. A) CaO versus SiO2 diagram displaying the chemical variability of Astroni 6 (newand literature data) and Capo Miseno glasses (literature data). Glasses from the Astroni6 eruption are characterized by a larger chemical variability relative to the Capo Misenoglasses. In fig. B the latter are included in the purple circle. (For interpretation of thereferences to colour in this figure legend, the reader is referred to the web version ofthis article.)


arguments, see Section 4.5). In case of site 181, the attribution of theupper tephra layer to a post-AV eruption is corroborated by the chemi-cal composition of the lower tephra, which confirms its attribution tothe AV-eruption (see Figs. 8 and 9). As to the upper tephra layer in thesection at site 181 (181-U), this can be ascribed to the AP1–2 eruptionon the basis of its glass chemistry (see Figs. 8 and 9).

The upper tephra layer must have been deposited relatively shortlyafter the AV-event (see also van Gorp et al., 2020) and represents a sig-nificant eruptive event, implying that this layer has to be attributed tothe AP2 eruption, the AP1 eruption being of minor magnitude (seeSantacroce et al., 2008). Magny et al. (2007) identified a tephra layerat the Lago di Accesa (Tuscany), which they ascribed to the inter-Plinian AP2-AP4 events (‘or ending phase of Avellino event’), clearlypostdating the Avellino eventwith a few centuries, based on its chemis-try and 14C datings. Tephra at Lago di Accesa, originating from the Vesu-vius, evidently must have passed over the Agro Pontino and ouridentification of the post-AV tephra layer as probably linked to theAP2 eruption is in line with their results.

As to the tephra layer encountered in the Fondi basin below the AV-layer (sample 197-L), the chemical data evidence that this tephra is ofPhlegraean origin (see Figs. 8 and 9B). The major potentially relevanteruption of the Campi Flegrei is the Agnano-Monte Spina eruption, ofwhich the tephra is widely distributed over the Central Mediterranean,but this eruption is considerably older (4690–4300 cal ka BP, see e.g.Iovine et al., 2017a, 2017b; Blockley et al., 2008) than the analysedtephra (see Table 2: c. 4 ka BP). For Tumolillo (site 1005), the chemicaldata combined with the 14C datings and Central Italiantephrostratigraphy leads to the attribution of the tephra found belowtheAV-layer to the latestmajor Phlegraean eruption, theAstroni 6 erup-tion (Tonarini et al., 2009 and references therein; Smith et al., 2011). Atfirst sight, the 14C datings from the FemminaMorta sequence (site 197)would not support the attribution of its lower tephra layer to theAstronieruptions, but these datings are not reliable, aswill be discussed inmoredetail in Section 5.3.

The occurrence of tephra from theAstroni eruption is in linewith theresults from Jouannic et al. (2013), who reported tephra from theAstroni eruption to occur in the Maccarese core and found similar 14Cages for this layer. Astroni tephra was also found in the Gulf of Gaetacore by Margaritelli et al. (2016) and Di Rita et al. (2018), but it was as-cribed to the Astroni 3 eruption that is slightly older (4098–4297 cal BP:Smith et al., 2011).Margaritelli et al. (2016) recognize a slightly youngertephra, which they attribute to Astroni 6 or Capo Miseno. The Astroni 6eruption has been dated at between 4098–4297 cal BP and3978–4192 cal BP (Smith et al., 2011), whereas the Capo Miseno erup-tion has been 40Ar/39Ar dated at 3700 ± 500 y BP (Di Renzo et al.,2011) and 5090± 140 y BP (Insinga et al., 2006). The chemical compo-sition of Astroni 6 glass is shown in Fig. 12A, together with the compo-sition of glasses attributed by Margaritelli et al. (2016) to CampoMiseno. All glass samples display the same variability in terms of CaOand SiO2 contents and this variability is higher than that of CapoMisenoglasses (purple circle in Fig. 12B).

The overlap among the dates and chemistry seriously hampers aunivocal attribution based on the chemical data. However,volcanological features of these two eruptions strongly support an attri-bution of the lower tephra to the Astroni 6 event. The Astroni 6 event,with the widest distributed tephra of the various Astroni events (Isaiaet al., 2004) and following on the Astroni 3 event, was a sub-Plinianeruption, and its tephra was distributed over a large part of the Campa-nian Plain, whereas Capo Miseno produced a tuff cone, without evi-dence for the generation of high eruption columns and with depositsdistributed in only a limited area around the vent.

5.2. Radiocarbon ages and their implications

14C dating is fundamental in tephrostratigraphy and can be decisivein case that chemical data are not available (absence of suited glass

fragments in the tephra layer analysed, or not analysed) or other criteria(see Section 5.1) are not applicable. 14C analyses allow to constrain theage of a tephra deposit and thus its identification, but not all sectionsstudied contained suited plant macro remains.

Marked differences exist in the range of ages obtained for materialsfrom below the AV-layer and for those from above (Table 3). Samplesfrom below the AV-layer exhibit a very small range in age, i.e.3530–3585 years BP, with a mean value of 3570 ± ca. 25 years BP, set-ting a clear lower age limit for the AV-layer, which is in linewith the ageof c. 1900 cal BC obtained by Alessandri (2019). These datings alone al-ready allow for identification of the related tephra layer as the AV-layer.The only deviating value is that for FemminaMorta (site 197, see later).

As to the ages obtained for materials directly above the AV-layer, afirst conclusion that can be drawn based on the above discussed resultsis that the ages published earlier by Sevink et al. (2011) for samplesfrom Migliara 44.5 and Campo Inferiore (3685 and 3635 years BP, re-spectively) are to be considered as too old, a conclusion that was alsodrawn by Alessandri (2019). Even when excluding these ages, varia-tions in age remain considerable (from 3505 to 3085 years BP). This ev-idently asks for an explanation, which might be sought in the lowsedimentation rate after tephra deposition and eventually a post-


tephra hiatus. The aberrant ages found for the FemminaMorta samples(site 197) cannot be attributed to such hiatus or low sedimentation rate.Being systematically too young and also of similar age, we attributethese to post-Avellino ‘homogenisation’ by bioturbation. Evidence forsuch bioturbation was observed in the thin sections (see bioporesabove AV-tephra in Fig. 6A).

Biases in the 14C dating of samples from above the presumed AV-layers do not prevent a reliable identification of these layers as AV-tephra, which can also be based on the results of other analyticalmethods used (see Table 1) or, in some cases, on the radiocarbon ageof samples from immediately below. These biases and their implicationsfor attempts to radiocarbon date the tephra layers from the coastal ba-sins of southern Lazio will be discussed in a separate paper (Sevinket al., 2020, submitted).

5.3. Spatial variation in sedimentological and lithological features of the AV-layer

Microscopic study of fractions >63 μm from all AV-layer samples onwhich analyses have been performed (see Table 1) and of the thin sec-tions showed that compositional variation in the tephra is limited toslight differences in the ratio pumice/mineral fragments – somewhatfewer pumice in tephra layers from the peat and pyritic clay samplesrelative to the gyttja samples. This is corroborated by the limited varia-tion in the chemical composition of the glass analysed, both in space andtime (see the Supplementary data on AV samples 122, 198 and 197-U,including subsamples 1, 2 and 3, and Figs. 8, 9) and is not unexpected,since it is not likely for significant temporal variation in compositionof the distal tephra to occur during such single phase of a large eruptiveevent. Nevertheless, it is clear that some fining occurredwith increasingdistance from the vent. This fining is in line with the observations bySulpizio et al. (2010b), but the sorting they observed, both with regardto grain size and components, concerns sorting close to the eruptioncentre (at maximum c. 30 km and within the EU5 isopach of 5 cm),rather than the truly distal fining observed by us for a distance rangeof 100–145 km. Lastly, within the tephra layer itself, no indicationswere found for temporal variation in grain size of the tephra, peakvalues being rather identical (see Supplemental data, samples 334 and405 in Fig. 11).

The fining trend is distinct, but the data need to be interpreted withcare, as evidenced by the marked differences in grain size between thetephra studied by Sevink et al. (2011) and the recent analyses for nearbytephra sites (see Fig. 11 and Supplemental file 2, sample 372 and 455).The earlier data were based on sieving after sample pre-treatment andremoval of the fraction <50 μm (by sieving), instead of a full analysisusing the Laser scan technique (see Materials andmethods). Moreover,a number of samples exhibited a bimodal or even more complex com-position, such as samples 508 and 372.

A typical example of a deviating composition comes from the deltaicto fluvial complex at Tratturo Caniò. Its sample (455) exhibits twomajorpeaks at c. 6 and 20–50 μm, and a third far less conspicuous peak atslightly over 200 μm. It is most probably only this third peak that canbe linked to the tephra. This would fit very well the data for the mostnearby sites Migliara 44.5 (sample 44.5) and Campo inferiore (sampleCampo), and strongly suggests that the coarser silt fraction is largelyof biotic origin. The sedimentary facies at Tratturo Caniò is a fluvial todeltaic levee, transitional to a basin, explaining the overall silty charac-ter of the sediment. Samples from La Cotarda, site 508 exhibit a similarpattern, with a third slight peak at c. 250 μm, whereas those fromRicci, site 372 suggest an even more complex origin and significantreworking of the original tephra, which given the facies (fluvio-deltaic)is quite likely.

In summary, samples from relatively tranquil (non-fluvial) sedi-mentary environments clearly exhibit a decreasing size of the dominanttephra fraction with increasing distance from its source and its non-calcareous fraction consists of tephra with varying amounts of siliceous

skeletal remains, whereas in more fluvial to deltaic environmentstephra material is far less abundant and has been subjected to syn-depositional sorting.

Remarkably, in hardly any of the several studies on the distal AV-tephra (from the EU5 phase) at locations further northwest, in Lazioand Tuscany (e.g. Lake Albano and Lake Nemi, Chondrogianni et al.,1996; Lago di Mezzano, Ramrath et al., 1999a, 1999b; Sadori, 2018;Lago di Accesa, Magny et al., 2007), information is provided on thegrain size distribution and more than an extremely concise descriptionof its components. An exception is formed by Ramrath et al. (1999a),who describe the AV-layer in the Lago di Mezzano as a ‘crystal tuffwith pumice, consisting of crystals with a grain size of ca. 50 μm andcomposed of sanidine and biotite. Leucite, nepheline, hornblende,titanaugite and rare olivine are also present. The rare glass particlesare brown and up to 40 μm in diameter’. Though further fining with in-creasing distance is evident, given the scarcity of data longer distancetrends in grain size distribution and composition of the distal AV-tephra remain uncertain.

5.4. Spatial variation of the AV-layer

As already described in Section 4.1, theAV-layerwaswidely encoun-tered in both theAgro Pontino and Fondi basin,wherever contemporaryenvironmental conditions were suited for its preservation and it oc-curred at such depth that it was not disturbed by recent soil labour(i.e. mostly deeper than 50 cm below the ground surface). At localscale, considerable differences exist in its spatial continuity that rangesfrom rather discontinuous in marshes and fluvio-deltaic environments,to virtually continuous in the highly calcareous lakes.

In marshy environments, the tephra was deposited on a dense veg-etation that could be reconstructed on the basis of the palaeoecologicaldata as a reed swamp (Doorenbosch and Field, 2019). This most proba-bly also held for fluvio-deltaic environments. Such vegetation did notexist in the highly calcareous lakes and truly anoxic swamps, where ad-ditionally bioturbation most likely was of very minor importance. Theinterception and redistribution of the tephra by vegetation explainsthe observed marked differences in the continuity of the layer, a phe-nomenon that has been extensively described in studies of recenttephra falls (e.g. Cutler et al., 2016; Dugmore et al., 2018). Thus, ingyttjas and truly anoxic clays the tephra layer could be readily tracedand followed over larger distances, a typical example of which was en-countered at Mezzaluna (site 405), where it could be very easilyfollowed as a continuous layer over hundreds of metres. In peats, theAV-layer was often discontinuous and several corings were needed toestablish its occurrence. Typical examples are the tephra layers (bothAV and Astroni tephra) at Femmina Morta (site 197) and Tumolillo(site 1005) where series of corings had to be performed to identifyand sample these layers..

5.5. Comparison of the Agro Pontino-Fondi basin record with other CentralItalian records

Our tephrochronological record can be compared with those fromother locations in Central Italy. A first example is the study byMargaritelli et al. (2016) and Di Rita et al. (2018) of cores from theGulf of Gaeta. Though their coring site was situated in between theSomma-Vesuvius and our area of study, and thus distal tephra fromthe Avellino eruptionmust have reached the Gulf of Gaeta in significantquantities, they did not find this tephra, nor any trace of the AP2 erup-tion. However, tephra from the Astroni 3 eruption and tephra thatthese authors identified as originating from the Capo Miseno eruption(3.7–5.1 ka BP)were found. Remarkably, Bellotti et al. (2016)who stud-ied the Holocene sediments in the very nearby Garigliano delta plainregularly observed a distinct pumice layer, which they identified astheAvellino pumice layer based on the 14C chronology of the cores stud-ied, but no other tephra layers from the Campi Flegrei (CapoMiseno) or


Somma-Vesuvius. They report older pumice layers (>7000 cal BP) asdue to Roccamonfina volcanic activity, based on geochemical analyses,but do not report results from these analyses. The study by Jouannicet al. (2013) on the Maccarese lagoon in the Tiber delta concerns a sin-gle core in deltaic sediments in which four distal tephra were found.These include the Astroni eruption and earlier eruptions. Here too, nodistal tephra from the Avellino and the AP2 eruptionswas encountered.Striking is that Avellino tephra has been found in all cores in lacustrinesediments further North: in the Lago di Albano (Chondrogianni et al.,1996), Lago di Mezzano (Ramrath et al., 1999b), and Lago di Accesa(Magny et al.,2007).

In our area of study, we found the AV-tephra layer wherever appro-priate sedimentary environments occurred. This further evidences theimportance of tephra from the EU5 eruptive phase of the Avellino erup-tion as tephrochronological marker for the Tyrrhenian coastal region ofCentral Italy and for the period concerned. That tephrochronological ar-chives may be incomplete is well-known, even if these are from envi-ronments in which hiatuses are unlikely to occur, such as crater lakesand deep marine environments. However, our results indicate that ifthe AV-tephra layer is absent in a potentially suitable sediment archivefrom the Tyrrhenian coastal area of Southern Lazio and adjacent Campa-nia, this is a contra-indication for continuity in its sediment record andthat attention needs to be paid to its absence rather than assumingsuch continuity, such as in case of theGulf of Gaeta andMaccarese cores.

5.6. Volcanological implications

Two of the three tephra layers that we found in the two coastal ba-sins studied are ultra-distal facies of pyroclastic density current (PDCs)deposits: the AV and the presumed Astroni 6 tephra. The AV-tephra isrelated to the EU5 unit, which was generated by phreatomagmatic ex-plosions during the final phases of this eruption. The associated PDCsflowed towards the northwest and reached distances of at least 25 kmfrom a vent located in the western slopes of the Somma-Vesuvius. Asdiscussed in previous studies (e.g. Sulpizio et al., 2008), during emplace-ment of the EU5 unit no powerful sustained columns were generated.The ash particles were elutriated from the currents and transported byatmospheric winds towards the northwest. These particles were depos-ited by fallout over a large area (Sulpizio et al., 2014) and their regulargrain-size distribution, fining with increasing distance from the vent,supports this emplacement mechanism. The transport of the particlesby atmospheric winds can explain the different dispersal direction ofEU5 with respect to the units generated by the main eruptive columns,whichdispersed their products towards the northeast, pushedby tropo-spheric winds. In terms of impact on vegetation, humans and anthropicstructures it is very important to take into account that with this kind ofevent the area affected can be very large.

The same phenomenon can explain the distribution of the Astroni 6unit towards the north. Following Costa et al. (2009), during the initialphase of the Astroni 6 event a 14 kmhigh Plinian columnwas generatedwith dispersal of its products (pumice lapilli) towards the east, whilethe overlying massive ash layers were widely spread over a large partof the central-northern Campanian Plain, in many cases covering ar-chaeological remains (Marzocchella, 1998; Di Vito et al., 1999; Isaiaet al., 2004). The absence of a preferential distribution of the ash sug-gests its correlation with the PDCs that followed the Plinian phase andin particular with an effective elutriation of the ash from the currentsdistributed radially around the vent and its long distance transport byatmospheric winds.

The AP2 eruption was fed by low eruption columns and was classi-fied as sub-Plinian by Cioni et al. (2008). Its proximal products show apreferential distribution of the coarse material towards the easternquadrants of the Somma-Vesuvius. During the eruption a long lastingash emission occurred generating a large amount of ash dispersed inthe atmosphere (Andronico and Cioni, 2002). This ash was transportedby atmospheric winds over large distances. The finding of a thin ash

layer from this eruption both in Calabria (Sevink et al., 2019) and insouthern Lazio opens new perspectives for tephrostratigraphic recon-structions in central-southern Italy.

Together, the results for these three distal tephra demonstrate thateven low-magnitude eruptions or phases of the Plinian events maylead to widespread distribution of tephra, far beyond the proximalareas. Most studies of volcanic hazards posed by the Campanian volca-noes tend to concentrate on proximal areas (e.g. Andronico and Cioni,2002; Cioni et al., 2008). Quantities of erupted pyroclastics are oftenbased on estimates for proximal deposits and do not include the trulydistal tephra. In the case of the EU5 event, a rough estimate can bebased on known occurrences of the distal EU5 layer to the northwestof the vent and a realistic mean thickness of 2 cm. This already leadsto an estimated c. 0.2 km3 of ejected tephra for the Tyrrhenian coastalarea, while the total volume of proximal tephra (10 cm isopach) thatwas erupted during the full AV-eruption (EU1–5) has been estimatedat c. 1.3 km3 by Zanchetta et al. (2011). Our results thus are in supportof the study by Sulpizio et al. (2014), who stressed the hazards posedby such events to truly distal areas.

6. Conclusions

Towards the end of the thirdmillennium BC postglacial sea level risedeclined. Under these changing conditions, along the Tyrrhenian coastof Southern Lazio long-shore sediment transport could lead to closureof beach ridge systems, inducing the development of freshwater la-goons. In the Agro Pontino and the Fondi basin, this created optimalconditions for preservation of distal tephra from Campanian volcanoes(Somma-Vesuvius and Campi Flegrei) falling into lagoons and lakes,and on associated marshy lowlands. The first of these was an Astronieruption (most probably the Astroni 6 eruption), of which tephra wasonly encountered in the Fondi basin, followed by the much more mas-sive arrival of tephra from the Avellino pumice eruption (EU5) and ulti-mately by a minor volume of tephra from the AP2 eruption, around1700 cal BC, which was traced in the southern Agro Pontino. Youngertephra falls were never encountered as recognizable layers in themany hundreds of corings executed, most probably because of a combi-nation of modern intensive soil labour destroying any eventuallyexisting tephra layer, a limited later (post c. 1700 cal BC) accumulationof peat and clastic sediment, and lesser suited conditions for tephrapreservation (notably soil erosion and massive colluviation) from theEarly Iron Age onward. Moreover, ash plumes from later eruptionsmay well have had a more eastern or southern direction.

The three distal tephra layers were identified based on: i. their sedi-mentological features and stratigraphic position; ii. the chemical compo-sition of their volcanic glass; iii. The age constrained by radiocarbondating. The AV-layer exhibited distinct fining with increasing distancefrom the volcano, but has markedly uniform macro characteristics, anda rather invariable chemical andmineralogical composition. It constitutesa readily identifiable, major marker bed in these coastal basins, allowingfor detailed palaeogeographical reconstructions, and testifies to the mag-nitude and direction of the EU5 tephra plume,which reached as far as theLago di Accesa in Central Tuscany. Tephra from the AP2 eruption and theAstroni 6 eruption, though both of lesser magnitude than the Plinianevents, must also have spread over the whole of the Tyrrhenian coastalarea of Central Italy, though in lesser amounts. This identification has im-portant implications for the impact of these relatively low-magnitudeeruptions, both in terms of emitted volume and areal distribution. More-over, the results underscore the need to include suchminor events in vol-canic hazard analyses and to extend these to more distal areas.

This study confirms the need to use multiple corings for obtaining acomplete tephrostratigraphic record for these Mediterranean coastaland deltaic areas, and for the recognition of eventual hiatuses in the sed-iment archives studied. Only in truly tranquil lacustrine to anoxic palu-dal environments we encountered more or less continuous tephralayers, but sediments from such environments unfortunately rarely


hold plant macro remains that are suited for radiocarbon dating. It isonly through an extensive coring program and study of a series ofcores in a range of sedimentary environments in the southern Lazialcoastal basins that we were able to obtain such complete stratigraphyfor the time window comprised between c. 2500 and c. 1000 BCE. InCentral Italy this period roughly corresponds to the Central ItalianBronze Age.

Data sets and other Supplementary material can be found at doi:10.17632/94xcsy9b2g.1, an open-source online data repository hosted atMendeley Data. Supplementary data to this article can be found onlineat https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jvolgeores.2020.107041.

CRediT authorship contribution statement

Jan Sevink: Conceptualization, Methodology, Validation, Investiga-tion, Resources, Writing - original draft, Writing - review & editing, Su-pervision, Project administration. Wouter van Gorp: Investigation,Resources, Writing - review & editing.Mauro A. Di Vito:Methodology,Validation, Investigation, Resources, Writing - review & editing. IleniaArienzo: Methodology, Validation, Investigation, Resources, Writing -review & editing.

Declaration of competing interest

The authors declare that they have no known competing financialinterests or personal relationships that could have appeared to influ-ence the work reported in this paper.

Acknowledgements

The authors sincerely thank Roberto Sulpizio and an anonymous re-viewer for their suggestions and constructive comments that improvedthe quality of the manuscript. The extensive coring and sampling pro-gram, which formed the basis for this research, had not been possiblewithout the aid of the other AV-project members: Luca Alessandri, MikeField and Marieke Doorenbosch. In the lab, we were supported by MikeField and Erica van Hees, both from Leiden University, with the selectionand identification of plant macro remains for radiocarbon dating. Wethank Corrie Bakels, Mike Field, andMarieke Doorenbosch for their help-ful comments. RCE at Amersfoort produced the thin sections, while facil-ities for grain size analysis were provided by the Vrije UniversiteitAmsterdamwith the support of Maarten Prins, Martine Hagen, and Unzevan Buuren. Hans van der Plicht and Luca Alessandri aided with theBayesian analysis of the radiocarbon data and interpretation of the 14Cdatings.ManuelaNazzari andPiergiorgio Scarlato are thanked for their as-sistance during the electron microprobe analyses at Rome. Thanks arealso due to AnnaMaiello and Enrico Vertechi for their support during pur-chase of the material necessary for the laboratory analyses at INGV, OV.

Funding

Thisworkwas supported by TheNetherlands Organisation for Scien-tific Research (NWO), Free Competition grant 360-61-060. The INGV,OV laboratories were financially supported by the EPOS Research Infra-structure through the contribution of the Italian Ministry of Universityand Research (MUR). The research by the INGV also received financialsupport from the Presidenza del Consiglio dei Ministri e Dipartimentodella Protezione Civile DPC-INGV project B2 WP 2 task 1.

References

Alessandri, L., 2019. The early and Middle Bronze Age (1/2) in South and centralTyrrhenian Italy and their connections with the Avellino eruption: an overview.Quat. Int. 499, 161–185. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.quaint.2018.08.002.

Andronico, D., Cioni, R., 2002. Contrasting styles of Mount Vesuvius activity in the periodbetween the Avellino and Pompeii Plinian eruptions, and some implications for

assessment of future hazards. Bull. Volcanol. 64 (6), 372–391. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00445-002-0215-4.

Arienzo, I., Moretti, R., Civetta, L., Orsi, G., Papale, P., 2010. The feeding system of Agnano-Monte Spina eruption (Campi Flegrei, Italy): dragging the past into the present activ-ity and future scenarios. Chem. Geology 270 (1–4), 135–147. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.chemgeo.2009.11.012.

Arienzo, I., D’Antonio, M., Di Renzo, V., Tonarini, S., Minolfi, G., Orsi, G., Carandente, A.,Belviso, P., Civetta, L., 2015. Isotopic microanalysis sheds light on the magmaticendmembers feeding volcanic eruptions: the Astroni 6 case study (Campi Flegrei,Italy). J. Volcanol. Geotherm. Res. 304, 24–37. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jvolgeores.2015.08.003.

Arienzo, I., Mazzeo, F.C., Moretti, R., Cavallo, A., D’Antonio, M., 2016. Open-systemmagmaevolution and fluid transfer at Campi Flegrei caldera (Southern Italy) during the past5 ka as revealed by geochemical and isotopic data: the archetype of Nisida eruption.Chem. Geol. 427, 109–124. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.chemgeo.2016.02.007.

Attema, P., 2017. Sedimentation as geomorphological bias and indicator of agricultural (un)sustainability in the study of the coastal plains of South and Central Italy in antiquity.J. Archaeol. Sci. Rep. 15, 459–469. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jasrep.2016.07.024.

Bakels, C., Sevink, J., Kuijper, W., Kamermans, H., 2015. The Agro Pontino Region, Refugeafter the Early Bronze Age Avellino Eruption of Mount Vesuvius, Italy? AnalectaPraehist. Leidensia. vol. 45. Leiden University, pp. 55–68. https://hdl.handle.net/11245/1.491854.

Bellotti, P., Calderoni, G., Dall’Aglio, P.L., D’Amico, C., Davoli, L., Di Bella, L., D’Orefice, M.,Esu, D., Ferrari, K., Bandini Mazzanti, M., Mercuri, A.M., Tarragoni, C., Torri, P., 2016.Middle-to late-Holocene environmental changes in the Garigliano delta plain (Cen-tral Italy): which landscape witnessed the development of the Minturnae Roman col-ony? The Holocene 26 (9), 1457–1471. https://doi.org/10.1177/0959683616640055.

Blockley, S.P.E., Bronk Ramsey, C., Pyle, D.M., 2008. Improved age modelling and high-precision age estimates of late Quaternary tephras, for accurate palaeoclimate recon-struction. J. Volcanol. Geotherm. Res. 177, 251–262. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jvolgeores.2007.10.015.

Bronk Ramsey, C., 2017. OxCal Program, Version 4.3.Chondrogianni, C., Ariztegui, D., Guilizzoni, P., Lami, A., 1996. Lakes Albano and Nemi

(central Italy): an overview. Mem.-Istituto Italiano Idrobiol. 55, 17–22.Cioni, R., Bertagnini, A., Santacroce, R., Andronico, D., 2008. Explosive activity and eruption

scenarios at Somma-Vesuvius (Italy): towards a new classification scheme.J. Volcanol. Geotherm. Res. 178, 331–346. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jvolgeores.2008.04.024.

Civetta, L., Galati, R., Santacroce, R., 1991. Magma mixing and convective compositionallayering within the Vesuvius magma chamber. Bull. Volcanol. 53, 287–300. https://doi.org/10.1007/BF00414525.

Costa, A., Dell’Erba, F., Di Vito, M., Isaia, R., Macedonio, G., Orsi, G., Pfeiffer, T., 2009. Tephrafallout hazard assessment at the Campi Flegrei caldera (Italy). Bull. Volcanol. 71,259–273. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00445-008-0220-3.

Cutler, N.A., Shears, O.M., Streeter, R.T., Dugmore, A.J., 2016. Impact of small-scale vegeta-tion structure on tephra layer preservation. Sci. Reports 6, 37260. https://doi.org/10.1038/srep37260.

D’Antonio, M., Tonarini, S., Arienzo, I., Civetta, L., Di Renzo, V., 2007. Components and pro-cesses in the magma genesis of the Phlegrean Volcanic District, southern Italy. Geol.Soc. Amer., Spec. Paper 418, 203–220. https://doi.org/10.1130/2007.2418(10).

D’Antonio, M., Tonarini, S., Arienzo, I., Civetta, L., Dallai, L., Moretti, R., Orsi, G., Andria, M.,Trecalli, A., 2013. Mantle and crustal processes in themagmatism of the Campania re-gion: inferences from mineralogy, geochemistry, and Sr–Nd–O isotopes of young hy-brid volcanics of the Ischia island (South Italy). Contrib. Mineral. Petrol. 165,1173–1194. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00410-013-0853-x.

Dent, D.L., 1986. Acid Sulphate Soils: A Baseline for Research and Development. No. 39.ILRI, Wageningen, The Netherlands (204 pp).

Di Renzo, V., Arienzo, I., Civetta, L., D'Antonio, M., Tonarini, S., Di Vito, M.A., Orsi, G., 2011. Themagmatic feeding systemof the Campi Flegrei caldera: architecture and temporal evolu-tion. Chem. Geol. 281, 227–241. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.chemgeo.2010.12.010.

Di Rita, F., Lirer, F., Bonomo, S., Cascella, A., Ferraro, L., Florindo, F., Insinga, D.D., Lurcock,P.C., Margaritelli, G., Petrosino, P., Rettori, R., Vallefuaco, M., Magri, D., 2018. Late Ho-locene forest dynamics in the Gulf of Gaeta (central Mediterranean) in relation toNAO variability and human impact. Quat. Sci. Rev. 179, 137–152. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.quascirev.2017.11.012.

Di Vito, M.A., Isaia, R., Orsi, G., Southon, J., de Vita, S., D’Antonio, M., Pappalardo, L., Piochi,M., 1999. Volcanism and deformation since 12,000 years at the Campi Flegrei caldera(Italy). J. Volcanol. Geotherm. Res. 91, 221–246. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0377-0273(99)00037-2.

Di Vito, M.A., Castaldo, N., de Vita, S., Bishop, J., Vecchio, G., 2013. Human colonization andvolcanic activity in the eastern Campania Plain (Italy) between the Eneolithic andLate Roman periods. Quat. Int. 303, 132–141. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.quaint.2013.01.001.

Doorenbosch, M., Field, M.H., 2019. A Bronze Age palaeoenvironmental reconstructionfrom the Fondi basin, southern Lazio, central Italy. Quat. Int. 499, 221–230. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.quaint.2018.03.022.

Dugmore, A., Streeter, R., Cutler, N., 2018. The role of vegetation cover and slope angle intephra layer preservation and implications for quaternary tephrostratigraphy.Palaeogeogr., Palaeoclim., Palaeoecol. 489, 105–116. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.palaeo.2017.10.002.

Feiken, H., 2014. Dealingwith Biases: Three Geo-archaeological Approaches to the HiddenLandscapes of Italy. vol. 26. Barkhuis, The Netherlands.

Feiken, H., Tol, G.W., Van Leusen, P.M., Anastasia, C., 2012. Reconstructing a Bronze Agehidden landscape: geoarchaeological research at Tratturo Caniò (Italy, 2009).Palaeohistoria 109–159.

http://dx.doi.org/10.17632/94xcsy9b2g.1

http://dx.doi.org/10.17632/94xcsy9b2g.1


https://doi.org/10.1016/j.quaint.2018.08.002

https://doi.org/10.1007/s00445-002-0215-4

https://doi.org/10.1007/s00445-002-0215-4

https://doi.org/10.1016/j.chemgeo.2009.11.012


https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jvolgeores.2015.08.003



https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jasrep.2016.07.024

https://hdl.handle.net/11245/1.491854

https://hdl.handle.net/11245/1.491854

https://doi.org/10.1177/0959683616640055



http://refhub.elsevier.com/S0377-0273(20)30129-3/rf0050





https://doi.org/10.1007/BF00414525

https://doi.org/10.1007/BF00414525

https://doi.org/10.1007/s00445-008-0220-3

https://doi.org/10.1038/srep37260

https://doi.org/10.1038/srep37260

https://doi.org/10.1130/2007.2418(10)

https://doi.org/10.1007/s00410-013-0853-x




https://doi.org/10.1016/j.quascirev.2017.11.012


https://doi.org/10.1016/S0377-0273(99)00037-2

https://doi.org/10.1016/S0377-0273(99)00037-2





https://doi.org/10.1016/j.palaeo.2017.10.002

https://doi.org/10.1016/j.palaeo.2017.10.002







Giaccio, B., Messina, P., Sposato, A., Voltaggio, M., Zanchetta, G., Galadini, F., Gpori, S.,Santacroce, R., 2009. Tephra layers from Holocene lake sediments of the SulmonaBasin, central Italy: implications for volcanic activity in Peninsular Italy andtephrostratigraphy in the central Mediterranean area. Quat. Sci. Rev. 28 (25–26),2710–2733. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.quascirev.2009.06.009.

Insinga, D., Calvert, A.T., Lanphere, M.A., Morra, V., Perrotta, A., Sacchi, M., Scarpati, C.,Saburomaru, J., Fedele, L., 2006. The Late-Holocene evolution of the Miseno area(southwestern Campi Flegrei) as inferred by stratigraphy, petrochemistry and40Ar/39Ar geochronology. In: De Vivo, B. (Ed.), Volcanism in the Campania Plain: Ve-suvius, Campi Flegrei and Ignimbrites. Elsevier, pp. 97–124.

Iovine, R.S., Fedele, L., Mazzeo, F.C., Arienzo, I., Cavallo, A., Wörner, G., Orsi, G., Civetta, L.,D’Antonio, M., 2017a. Timescales of magmatic processes prior to the ~4.7 ka Agnano-Monte Spina eruption (Campi Flegrei caldera, Southern Italy) based on diffusionchronometry from sanidine phenocrysts. Bull. Volcanol. 79 (2), 18. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00445-017-1101-4.

Iovine, R.S., Mazzeo, F.C., Arienzo, I., D’Antonio, M., Wörner, G., Civetta, L., Pastore, Z., Orsi,G., 2017b. Source and magmatic evolution inferred from geochemical and Sr-O-isotope data on hybrid lavas of Arso, the last eruption at Ischia island (Italy; 1302AD). J. Volcanol. Geotherm. Res. 331, 1–15. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jvolgeores.2016.08.008.

Iovine, R.S., Mazzeo, F.C., Wörner, G., Pelullo, C., Cirillo, G., Arienzo, I., Pack, A., D’Antonio,M., 2018. Coupled δ18O-δ17O and 87Sr/86Sr isotope compositions suggest a radiogenicand 18O-enriched magma source for Neapolitan volcanoes (Southern Italy). Lithos316-317, 199–211. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.lithos.2018.07.009.

Isaia, R., D’Antonio, M., Dell’Erba, F., Di Vito, M.A., Orsi, G., 2004. The Astroni volcano: theonly example of close eruptions within the same vent area during the recent historyof the Campi Flegrei caldera (Italy). J. Volcanol. Geotherm. Res. 133, 171–192. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0377-0273(03)00397-4.

Jouannic, G., Gillot, P.Y., Goiran, J.P., Lefevre, J.C., Siani, G., Salomon, F., Arnoldus-Huyzendveld, A., 2013. Tephrochronological study in the Maccarese Lagoon (nearRome, Italy): identification of Holocene tephra layers. Quat., Rev. Assoc. Franc. Et.Quat. 24 (1), 65–74.

Jung, R., 2017. Chronological problems of the Middle Bronze age in Southern Italy. In:Lachenal, T., Mordant, J., Nicolas, T., Véber, C. (Eds.), Le Bronze moyen et l’originedu Bronze final en Europe occidentale (XVIIe–XIIIe siècle av. J.-C.). Colloque interna-tional de l’APRAB, Strasbourg, 17 au 20 juin 2014. Mém. Archéol. Grand-Est 1,pp. 623–642.

Lambeck, K., Antonioli, F., Anzidei, M., Ferranti, L., Leoni, G., Scicchitano, G., Silenzi, S.,2011. Sea level change along the Italian coast during the Holocene and projectionsfor the future. Quat. Int. 232 (1), 250–257. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.quaint.2010.04.026.

Magny, M., De Beaulieu, J.L., Drescher-Schneider, R., Vannière, B., Walter-Simonnet, A.V.,Miras, Y., Millet, L., Bossuet, G., Peyron, O., Brugiapaglia, E., Leroux, A., 2007. Holoceneclimate changes in the central Mediterranean as recorded by lake-level fluctuationsat Lake Accesa (Tuscany, Italy). Quat. Sci. Rev. 26 (13–14), 1736–1758. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.quascirev.2007.04.014.

Margaritelli, G., Vallefuoco, M., Di Rita, F., Capotondi, L., Bellucci, L.G., Insinga, D.D.Petrosino,P., Bonomoa, S., Cacho, I., Cascella, A., Ferraroa, L., Florindo, F., Lubritto, C.,Lurcock, P.C., Magri, D., Pelosi, N., Rettori, R., Lirer, F., 2016. Marine response to cli-mate changes during the last five millennia in the central Mediterranean Sea. Glob.Planetary Change 142, 53–72. doi:https://doi.org/10.1016/j.gloplacha.2016.04.007.

Marzocchella, A., 1998. Tutela Archeologica e Preistoria nella Pianura Campana. In: Guzzo,P.G., Peroni, R. (Eds.), Archeologia e Vulcanologia in Campania. Arte Tipografica, Na-poli, pp. 97–133.

Orsi, G., Di Vito, M.A., Selva, J., Marzocchi, W., 2009. Long-term forecast of eruption styleand size at Campi Flegrei caldera (Italy). Earth Planet. Sci. Lett. 287, 265–276.https://doi.org/10.1016/j.epsl.2009.08.013.

Petrini, R., Forte, C., Orsi, G., Piochi, M., Pinzino, C., Pedrazzi, G., 2001. Influence of magmadynamics on melt structure: spectroscopic studies on volcanic glasses from theCretaio Tephra of Ischia (Italy). Contrib. Mineral. Petrol. 140, 532–542. https://doi.org/10.1007/s004100000209.

Ramrath, A., Nowaczyk, N.R., Negendank, J.F., 1999a. Sedimentological evidence for envi-ronmental changes since 34,000 years BP from Lago di Mezzano, central Italy.J. Paleolimnol. 21 (4), 423–435. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0277-3791(99)00009-8.

Ramrath, A., Zolitschka, B., Wulf, S., Negendank, J.F., 1999b. Late Pleistocene climatic var-iations as recorded in two Italian maar lakes (Lago di Mezzano, Lago Grande diMonticchio). Quat. Sci. Rev. 18 (7), 977–992. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0277-3791(99)00009-8.

Sadori, L., 2018. The Lateglacial and Holocene vegetation and climate history of Lago diMezzano (central Italy). Quat. Sci. Rev. 202, 30–44. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.quascirev.2018.09.004.

Santacroce, R., Cioni, R., Marianelli, P., Sbrana, A., Sulpizio, R., Zanchetta, G., Donahue, D.J.,Joron, J.L., 2008. Age and whole rock-glass compositions of proximal pyroclasticsfrom the major explosive eruptions of Somma-Vesuvius: a review as a tool for distaltephrostratigraphy. J. Volcanol. Geotherm. Res. 177, 1–18. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jvolgeores.2008.06.009.

Sevink, J., 2020. Burnt clay or terra bruciata in coastal basins of Southern Lazio, Italy: ev-idence for prehistoric ignicoltura or resulting from drainage of Holocene pyritic sed-iments? J. Archaeol. Sci. Rep. 32. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jasrep.2020.102432.

Sevink, J., Vos, P., Westerhoff, W.E., Stierman, A., Kamermans, H., 1982. A sequence of ma-rine terraces near Latina (Agro Pontino, Central Italy). Catena 9 (3/4), 361–378.https://doi.org/10.1016/0341-8162(82)90010-8.

Sevink, J., Remmelzwaal, A., Spaargaren, O.C., 1984. The soils of Southern Lazio and adja-cent Campania. Publ. Fys. Geogr. Lab. UvA, nr. 38, p. 140.

Sevink, J., van Bergen, M.J., van der Plicht, J., Feiken, H., Anastasia, C., Huizinga, A., 2011.Robust date for the Bronze age Avellino eruption (Somma-Vesuvius): 3945 ± 10calBP (1995 ± 10 calBC)Quat. Sci. Rev. 30, 1035–1046. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.quascirev.2011.02.001.

Sevink, J., Van der Plicht, J., Feiken, H., Van Leusen, P.M., Bakels, C.C., 2013. The Holoceneof the Agro Pontino graben: recent advances in its palaeogeography, palaeoecology,and tephrostratigraphy. Quat. Int. 303, 153–162. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.quaint.2013.01.006.

Sevink, J., di Vito, M.A., Piochi, M., Mormone, A., Bakels, C.C., Van Gorp, W., 2018. A rareMid-Würmian lithoid tuff in the Agro Pontino graben (Southern Lazio, Italy) and itsidentification as an Albano 5-7 related distal tephra deposit (41-36 kaBP): character-istics, provenance and palaeogeographical implications. Ann. Geophys. 61 (1), 1–15.https://doi.org/10.4401/ag-7574.

Sevink, J., Bakels, C., Attema, P., Di Vito, M.A., Arienzo, I., 2019. Holocene vegetation recordof upland northern Calabria, Italy: environmental change and human impact. The Ho-locene 29 (4), 633–647. https://doi.org/10.1177/0959683618824695.

Sevink, J., Bakels, C.C., Van Hall, R.L., Dee, M.W., 2020. Radiocarbon dating distal tephrafrom the Early Bronze Age Avellino eruption (EU 5) in the coastal basins of southernLazio (Italy): uncertainties, results, and implications for dating distal tephra. Submit-ted. Quat. Geochronol.

Smith, V.C., Isaia, R., Pearce, N.J.G., 2011. Tephrostratigraphy and glass compositions ofpost-15 kyr Campi Flegrei eruptions: implications for eruption history and chrono-stratigraphic markers. Quat. Sci. Rev. 30 (25–26), 3638–3660. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.quascirev.2011.07.012.

Sulpizio, R., Bonasia, R., Dellino, P., Di Vito, M.A., La Volpe, L., Mele, D., Zanchetta, G., Sadori,L., 2008. Discriminating the long distance dispersal of fine ash from sustained col-umns or near ground ash clouds: the example of the Pomici di Avellino eruption(Somma-Vesuvius, Italy). J. Volcanol. Geotherm. Res. 177 (1), 263–276. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jvolgeores.2007.11.012.

Sulpizio, R., Cioni, R., Di Vito, M.A., Mele, D., Bonasia, R., Dellino, P., 2010a. The Pomici diAvellino eruption of Somma-Vesuvius (3.9 ka BP). Part I: stratigraphy, compositionalvariability and eruptive dynamics. Bull. Volcanol. 72 (5), 539–558. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00445-009-0339-x.

Sulpizio, R., Bonasia, R., Dellino, P., Mele, D., Di Vito, M.A., La Volpe, L., 2010b. The Pomici diAvellino eruption of Somma–Vesuvius (3.9 ka BP). Part II: sedimentology and physi-cal volcanology of pyroclastic density current deposits. Bull. Volcanol. 72 (5),559–577. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00445-009-0340-4.

Sulpizio, R., Welden, A.V., Caron, B., Zanchetta, G., 2010c. The Holocenetephrostratigraphic record of Lake Shkodra (Albania and Montenegro). J. Quat. Sci.25 (5), 633–650. https://doi.org/10.1002/jqs.1334.

Sulpizio, R., Zanchetta, G., Caron, B., Dellino, P.F., Mele, D., Giaccio, B., Insinga, D., Paterne,M., Siani, G., Costa, A., Macedonio, G., Santacroce, R., 2014. Volcanic ash hazard in theCentral Mediterranean assessed from geological data. Bull. Volcanol. 76, 866. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00445-014-0866-y.

Tonarini, S., D’Antonio, M., Di Vito, M.A., Orsi, G., Carandente, A., 2009. Geochemical and B-Sr-Nd isotopic evidence for mingling and mixing processes in the magmatic systemthat fed the Astroni volcano (4.1–3.8 ka) within the Campi Flegrei caldera (southernItaly). Lithos 107, 135–151. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.lithos.2008.09.012.

Vacchi, M., Marriner, N., Morhange, C., Spada, G., Fontana, A., Rovere, A., 2016. Multiproxyassessment of Holocene relative sea-level changes in the western Mediterranean:sea-level variability and improvements in the definition of the isostatic signal.Earth-Sci. Rev. 155, 172–197. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.earscirev.2016.02.002.

Van Gorp, W., Sevink, J., 2019. Distal deposits of the Avellino eruption as a marker for thedetailed reconstruction of the Early Bronze Age depositional environment in the AgroPontino and Fondi Basin (Lazio, Italy). Quat. Int. 499, 245–257. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.quaint.2018.03.017.

van Gorp, W., Sevink, J., van Leusen, P.M., 2020. Post-depositional subsidence of theAvellino tephra marker bed in the Pontine plain (Lazio, Italy): implications for EarlyBronze Age palaeogeographical, water level and relative sea level reconstruction. Ca-tena 194, 104770. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.catena.2020.104770.

Van Joolen, E., 2003. Archaeological Land Evaluation. A Reconstruction of the Suitability ofAncient Landscapes for Various Land Uses in Italy Focused on the FirstMillennium BC.Groningen.

Wulf, S., Kraml, M., Brauer, A., Keller, J., Negendank, J.F., 2004. Tephrochronology of the100 ka lacustrine sediment record of Lago Grande di Monticchio (southern Italy).Quat. Int. 122 (1), 7–30. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.quaint.2004.01.028.

Zanchetta, G., Sulpizio, R., Roberts, N., Cioni, R., Eastwood,W.J., Siani, G., Caron, B., Paterne,M., Santacroce, R., 2011. Tephrostratigraphy, chronology and climatic events of theMediterranean basin during the Holocene: an overview. The Holocene 21, 33–52.https://doi.org/10.1177/0959683610377531.








https://doi.org/10.1007/s00445-017-1101-4

https://doi.org/10.1007/s00445-017-1101-4



https://doi.org/10.1016/j.lithos.2018.07.009

https://doi.org/10.1016/S0377-0273(03)00397-4

https://doi.org/10.1016/S0377-0273(03)00397-4













https://doi.org/10.1016/j.gloplacha.2016.04.007




https://doi.org/10.1016/j.epsl.2009.08.013

https://doi.org/10.1007/s004100000209

https://doi.org/10.1007/s004100000209

https://doi.org/10.1016/S0277-3791(99)00009-8

https://doi.org/10.1016/S0277-3791(99)00009-8

https://doi.org/10.1016/S0277-3791(99)00009-8





https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jasrep.2020.102432

https://doi.org/10.1016/0341-8162(82)90010-8







https://doi.org/10.4401/ag-7574

https://doi.org/10.1177/0959683618824695









https://doi.org/10.1007/s00445-009-0339-x

https://doi.org/10.1007/s00445-009-0339-x

https://doi.org/10.1007/s00445-009-0340-4

https://doi.org/10.1002/jqs.1334

https://doi.org/10.1007/s00445-014-0866-y

https://doi.org/10.1007/s00445-014-0866-y

https://doi.org/10.1016/j.lithos.2008.09.012

https://doi.org/10.1016/j.earscirev.2016.02.002



https://doi.org/10.1016/j.catena.2020.104770





https://doi.org/10.1177/0959683610377531

distal tephra from campanian eruptions in early late holocene … · 2020. 9. 22. · tephra layer...

Documents